'O 

i i>^\s 

■ \ 

wlV‘  . 


The  Community  Pulpit 


Can  China  Save  the  West? 

A Study  in  Comparative  Civilizations 

By 

John  Herman  Randall 

Associate  Minister  of  the  Community  Church 


Series  1922-1923  ~ No.  XVIII 


Price,  10  Cents 


Published  by 

The  Community  Church 

Park  Avenue  and  34th  Street 
New  York  City 


NOTICE 

The  publication  of  these  addresses  is  made  possible  by  a 
Sermon  and  Publication  Fund.  For  the  sake  of  securing 
as  wide  a distribution  as  possible,  the  addresses  are  sold  at 
a minimum  charge  which,  in  these  days  of  expensive 
printing,  is  considerably  less  than  the  cost  price.  Volun- 
tary gifts  to  the  Fund  are  therefore  greatly  needed  and 
may  be  sent  to  the  Secretary  at  the  Church  Office,  61  East 
34th  Street. 


The  Community  Pulpit,  by  tradition  and  practice,  is  a 
free  platform,  dedicated  to  the  ideal  of  truth.  Its  ad- 
dresses in  both  their  spoken  and  written  form,  are  the 
utterances  of  the  preacher,  who  accepts  for  them  exclusive 
responsibility. 


CAN  CHINA  SAVE  THE  WEST? 

A STUDY  IN  COMPARATIVE  CIVILIZATIONS 


O ALL  who  look  beneath  the  surface  of 
our  troubled  life  today  the  most  signifi- 
cant thing  that  is  taking  place  is  the 
gradual  re-valuation  of  values  on  the 
part  of  thoughtful  minds  everywhere. 
Nowhere  is  this  more  apparent  than  in  the  field  of  com- 
parative civilizations,  where  the  contrast  is  being  drawn 
between  the  ideals  and  ends  of  Western  civilization  and 
those  of  the  older  civilizations  of  the  world.  In  this  con- 
nection I would  like  to  call  attention  to  two  very  remark- 
able articles  appearing  in  the  February  and  March  num- 
bers of  The  Century  Magazine  by  Nathaniel  Peffer,  an 
American,  who  has  spent  many  years  in  the  Far  East. 
These  articles  deal  with  “The  Revolt  Against  Civiliza- 
tion,” but  it  is  the  author’s  contention  that  this  present 
world-wide  revolt  is  not  so  much  a revolt  of  non-whites 
against  the  whites, ^ — a racial  revolt,  as  many  claim, — as  it 
is  a revolt  against  the  fundamental  philosophy  upon  which 
the  white  man  has  built  his  civilization,  a revolt  in  which 
the  white  man  himself  is  beginning  to  take  part. 

It  is  in  this  field  of  comparative  civilizations  that  a most 
interesting  thing  has  recently  taken  place.  Two  of  the 
most  distinguished  and  outstanding  philosophers  of  the 
Western  world  have,  in  the  last  few  years,  visited  China, 
— John  Dewey  of  America  and  Bertrand  Russell  of  Eng- 
land. As  philosophers,  they  are  known  not  for  their  in- 


[3] 


terest  in  ancient  problems  or  their  absorption  in  questions 
of  metaphysics,  but  because  of  their  devotion  to  the  prob- 
lems of  today’s  life,  and  chiefly,  to  the  understanding  and 
direction  of  those  factors  and  forces  which  have  to  do 
with  the  moral  and  social  control  of  man’s  life.  Both  went 
to  China  primarily  to  lecture  and  to  teach ; but  both  con- 
fess that  every  day  they  stayed  they  thought  less  of  what 
they  had  to  teach  the  Chinese  and  more  of  what  they  had 
to  learn  from  them.  Since  their  return,  John  Dewey  has 
been  giving  us  his  “impressions”  in  a number  of  most 
illuminating  articles,  and,  quite  recently,  Bertrand  Russell 
has  published  his  book,  “The  Problem  of  China,”  which 
John  Dewey,  in  a review  published  in  The  Dial,  calls 
“the  most  enlightening,  in  information  and  comment,  of 
all  the  many  works  which  have  been  recently  written  to 
put  Western  readers  in  touch  with  the  issues  of  the  Far 
East.” 

The  book  gives  a remarkably  clear  and  condensed  ac- 
count of  the  historical  forces  and  factors  which  have  led 
up  to  the  present  situation  in  the  Far  East,  together  with 
a most  discriminating  analysis  of  present  conditions,  and 
is  to  be  recommended  to  all  who  seek  a better  under- 
standing of  the  situation  in  the  Far  East  and  the  factors 
involved.  But  the  book  is  much  more  than  this.  In  Ber- 
trand Russell’s  treatment,  the  Problem  of  China  becomes 
the  Problem  of  our  Western  civilization,  and  it  is  in  this 
aspect  of  the  book  that  I am  especially  interested  this 
morning. 

In  the  first  chapter,  Mr.  Russell  tells  us  that  it  was  on  a 
Volga  river  boat  in  the  summer  of  1920  that  he  first 
realized  “how  profound  is  the  disease  in  our  Western 
mentality,  which  the  Bolsheviks  are  attempting  to  force 
upon  an  essentially  Asiatic  population,  just  as  Japan  and 


[4] 


the  West  are  doing  in  China.”  He  says,  ‘‘Our  boat  trav- 
eled on,  day  after  day,  through  an  unknown  and  mys- 
terious land.  Our  company  were  noisy,  gay,  quarrelsome, 
full  of  facile  theories,  with  glib  explanations  of  every- 
thing, persuaded  that  there  is  nothing  they  could  not  un- 
derstand and  no  human  destiny  outside  the  purview  of 
their  system.”  Yet  one  of  the  company  lay  at  death’s 
door  and  “all  around  us  lay  a great  silence,  strong  as 
death,  unfathomable  as  the  heavens.  It  seemed  that  none 
had  the  leisure  to  hear  the  silence,  yet  it  called  to  me  so 
insistently  that  I grew  deaf  to  the  harangues  of  propa- 
gandists and  the  information  of  the  well-informed.  * * * 
It  was  in  this  mood  that  I set  out  for  China  to  seek  a new 
hope.” 

After  his  return  from  China  it  seemed  to  him  that  the 
noisy,  doctrinaire,  self-assertive,  cocksure,  propagandiz- 
ing set  of  passengers  who  had  accompanied  him  on  the 
Volga  river  boat  were  only  a symbol  of  Western  mental- 
ity going  headlong  to  destruction.  China,  in  contrast,  is 
the  brooding  silence  of  nature,  calm, — indolent,  perhaps, 
but  still  tranquil  in  soul, — ^tolerant,  possessed  of  an  un- 
broken instinctive  sympathy  with  nature,  and  power  to 
draw  consolation  and  happiness  from  simple  things,  con- 
tent with  death  as  with  life  because  free  from  the  corrod- 
ing egotism  of  the  West. 

In  setting  forth  the  contrast,  in  general,  as  Bertrand 
Russell  sees  it,  I want  to  quote  a few  passages  taken  at 
random  from  the  book.  “Our  Western  civilization  is 
built  upon  assumptions  which,  to  a psychologist,  are  ra- 
tionalizings  of  excessive  energy.  Our  industrialism,  our 
militarism,  our  love  of  progress,  our  missionary  zeal,  our 
imperialism,  our  passion  for  dominating  and  organizing, 
all  spring  from  a superflux  of  the  itch  for  activity.  The 
creed  of  efficiency  for  its  own  sake,  without  regard  for  the 


[5] 


ends  to  which  it  is  directed,  has  become  somewhat  dis- 
credited in  Europe  since  the  war,  which  would  never 
have  taken  place  if  the  Western  nations  had  been  slightly 
more  indolent.  * * * Through  industrialism  and  the 
high  pressure  at  which  most  of  us  live  we  have  lost  that 
instinctive  happiness  and  joy  of  living  which  China  has 
retained.  * * t Our  prosperity  can  be  obtained  only 
by  widespread  oppression  and  exploitation  of  weaker  na- 
tions, while  the  Chinese  are  not  strong  enough  to  injure 
other  countries,  and  they  secure  whatever  they  enjoy  by 
means  of  their  own  merits  and  exertions  alone.  * * ♦ 
By  valuing  progress  and  efficiency  we  have  secured  power 
and  wealth ; by  ignoring  them,  the  Chinese,  until  we 
brought  disturbance,  secured  upon  the  whole  a peaceable 
existence  and  a life  full  of  enjoyment.  * * ♦ The 

Chinese  have  discovered,  and  have  practiced  for  many 
centuries,  a way  of  life  which,  if  it  could  be  adopted  by 
all  the  world,  would  make  all  the  world  happy.  We 
Europeans  have  not.  Our  way  of  life  demands  strife, 
exploitation,  restless  change,  discontent  and  destruction.” 
And  John  Dewey  adds,  that  America  is  Europe  at  its 
worst  because  it  is  Europe  at  its  peak  of  energy,  efficiency 
and  proselytizing  intolerance,  plus  a complacent  and  im- 
penetrable self-righteousness  which  in  Europe  is  begin- 
ning to  crumble.  America  presents  the  acme  of  the 
mechanistic  outlook,  “something  which  exists  equally  in 
imperialism,  Bolshevism  and  the  Y.  M.  C.  A.  * * * 

the  habit  of  regarding  mankind  as  raw  material,  to  be 
moulded  by  our  scientific  manipulation  into  whatever 
form  may  happen  to  suit  our  fancy.  * * * the  cultiva- 
tion of  will  at  the  expense  of  perception.  It  is  belief  in 
government,  in  a life  against  nature,  in  the  desirability 
of  conversion  to  one’s  own  point  of  view  and  creed  that 
Chinese  culture  has  escaped.” 


[6] 


In  comparing  an  alien  culture  with  one’s  own,  one  is 
forced  to  ask  himself  some  fundamental  questions  at  the 
outset,  in  order  to  have  before  him  a criterion  by  which 
to  judge.  These  questions  are  rarely  asked  unless  one  is 
driven  by  some  deep  crisis  to  consider  critically  the  whole 
matter  of  values.  At  such  times  one  is  forced  to  inquire: 
What  are  the  things  that  I ultimately  value  ? What 
would  make  me  judge  one  society  as  more  desirable  than 
another?  What  sort  of  ends  should  I most  wish  to  see 
realized  in  the  world?  And  Mr.  Russell  reminds  us  that 
different  people  will  answer  these  questions  differently. 
His  own  answer  to  these  questions  is  as  follows:  “The 
main  things  which  seem  to  me  important  on  their  own 
account,  and  not  merely  as  means  to  other  things,  are : 
knowledge,  art,  instinctive  happiness,  and  relations  of 
friendship  and  affection.” 

He  explains  further  just  what  he  means  by  these  things 
of  ultimate  value.  By  knowledge,  he  does  not  mean  all 
knowledge.  There  is  much  in  the  way  of  dry  lists  of 
facts  that  is  merely  useful  and  still  more  that  has  no  ap- 
preciable value  of  any  kind.  The  understanding  of  nature 
he  holds  to  be  good  and  delightful  on  its  own  account. 
Some  biographies  and  parts  of  history  he  also  deems 
valuable ; and  no  doubt  he  would  include  knowledge  of 
the  best  in  literature.  By  art,  he  does  not  mean  the  de- 
liberate production  of  trained  artists,  “though,  of  course, 
these  at  their  best,  deserve  the  highest  place.”  But  he 
has  in  mind  the  almost  unconscious  reaching  after  beauty 
which  one  finds  among  Russian  peasants  and  Chinese 
coolies,  “the  sort  of  impulse  that  creates  folk-songs,  that 
existed  among  ourselves  before  the  time  of  the  Puritans, 
and  survives  in  cottage  gardens.”  All  will  agree  that  in- 
stinctive happiness  or  joy  of  life  is  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant values  of  human  existence,  but  he  points  out  what 


[7] 


we  all  know,  that  it  has  well-nigh  been  lost  through  in- 
dustrialism and  the  high  pressure  under  which  we  live ; 
“its  commonness  in  China  is  a strong  reason  for  thinking 
well  of  Chinese  civilization.” 

There  is  another  question  to  be  considered  in  judging 
of  a society;  not  only  how  much  of  good  or  evil  there  is 
within  a particular  society,  but  also  what  effects  it  has  in 
promoting  good  or  evil  in  other  societies,  and  how  far 
the  good  things  it  enjoys  depends  upon  evils  elsewhere. 
In  this  respect  also  he  thinks  China  is  better  than  we  are. 
For  most  of  the  prosperity  of  Western  civilization  can 
only  be  obtained  by  wide-spread  oppression  and  exploi- 
tation of  weaker  peoples,  while  whatever  the  Chinese 
enjoy  is  theirs  by  virtue  of  their  exertions  alone. 

Let  no  one  imagine  that  this  question  of  the  compara- 
tive merits  of  Eastern  and  Western  civilizations  is  a 
purely  academic  question  or  an  empty  intellectual  exer- 
cise. It  lies  at  the  basis  of  all  international  and  inter- 
racial problems.  It  involves  practical  questions  affecting 
directly  every  man’s  every-day  existence.  We  formulate 
political  policies,  embark  on  definite,  immediate  enter- 
prises, levy  taxes  on  ourselves,  engage  in  diplomatic  ne- 
gotiations, build  larger  armies  and  navies,  and  take  steps 
leading  inevitably  to  war, — all  in  strict  obedience  to  our 
own  particular  views  of  the  ultimate  values  of  human 
life,  that  is,  our  philosophy  as  to  what  really  constitutes 
civilization.  Because  of  these  views  we  are  committed 
in  our  most  vital  relations  as  individuals  and  in  our  ac- 
tions as  states.  Our  individual  well-being  and  our  future 
as  nations  are  profoundly  affected.  According  to  the 
philosophy  underlying  Western  civilization,  the  policy  of 
the  great  Powers  toward  China,  India,  Africa,  Turkey, 
Mexico  and  all  insular  territories  is  in  its  every  aspect, 
based  on  the  premise  that  the  whole  world  must  become 


[8] 


mechanized  and  industrialized,  and  that  the  twentieth- 
century  civilization  of  the  Occident  is  the  form  of  life  to 
which  every  race  must  eventually  adapt  itself,  regardless 
of  what  other  values  may  be  lost  in  the  process. 

We  need  to  remember  that  our  modern  industrial  civi- 
lization is  only  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  old,  and  that 
up  to  that  time  the  white  race  measured  even  by  material 
standards,  was  backward,  as  one  can  discover  by  reading 
of  the  travels  of  the  first  European  visitors  to  the  East, 
notably  Marco  Polo,  and  the  accounts  of  contemporary 
conditions  in  Europe.  By  comparison  with  the  cities  of 
China  in  such  matters  as  roads,  pavements,  cleanliness, 
sanitation,  imposing  buildings,  fine  shops  and  business  or- 
ganization, European  cities  were  rude  and  primitive.  If 
we  leave  out  what  science  has  done  for  the  West, — and 
on  the  material  side  of  life  its  contribution  has  indeed 
been  tremendous — all  else,  art,  music,  literature,  laws, 
codifications  of  conduct,  philosophies  and  religious  sys- 
tems,— in  short,  all  the  refinements  of  life  are  to  be  found 
in  the  culturali  systems  of  these  older  civilizations ; it 
might  even  be  argued  successfully  that  in  these  respects 
theirs  is  superior.  In  view  of  these  facts,  does  it  not  seem 
presumptions  for  us  to  assume,  without  more  convincing 
evidence  than  lies  upon  the  surface,  that  our  new  and 
very  young  civilization  is  the  best  and  only  form  for  all 
the  world,  and  that  all  races  and  peoples  must  perforce 
conform  their  entire  life,  which  antedates  ours,  remem- 
ber, by  many  centuries,  to  our  mechanized  standards? 
Judged  historically  and  measured  by  race-time,  is  it  not 
modern  civilization  that  is  the  abnormal  and  untested  as 
yet  ? Should  not  the  burden  of  proof  rest  upon  it,  rather 
than  upon  the  older  forms  of  cultural  life?  This  at  least 
is  what  our  two  Western  philosophers  suggest,  on  their 
return  from  their  sojourn  in  the  East. 


[9] 


In  making  the  contrast  between  the  older  and  newer 
forms  of  civilizations,  Bertrand  Russell  traces  Western 
civilization  back  to  three  ultimate  sources : ( 1 ) Greek  cul- 
ture; (2)  Jewish  religion  and  ethics;  (3)  Modem  indus- 
trialism, which  is  itself  a direct  outcome  of  modem 
science.  From  the  Greeks  we  derive  literature  and  the 
arts,  philosophy  and  pure  mathematics ; also  the  more 
urbane  portions  of  our  social  outlook.  From  the  Jews  we 
derive  “fanatical  belief,  which  its  friends  call  ‘faith’ ; 
moral  fervor,  with  the  conception  of  sin;  religious  intol- 
erance, and  some  part  of  our  nationalism.”  From  science 
we  derive  power  and  the  sense  of  power,  “the  belief  that 
we  are  as  gods,  and  may  justly  be  the  arbiters  of  life  and 
death  for  all  unscientific  races.”  We  derive  also  the 
empirical  method,  by  which  almost  all  real  knowledge 
has  been  acquired.  These  three  elements,  Mr.  Russell 
thinks,  account  for  most  of  our  mentality. 

These  influences,  which  have  played  such  a 'predomi- 
nating part  in  the  formation  of  Western  mentality,  have 
in  the  last  one  hundred  and  fifty  years,  culminated  in 
modern  industrialism,  to  which  everything  else  has  been 
subordinated.  Western  civilization,  so  far  as  it  is  dis- 
tinguished from  other  civilizations,  is  science.  Steam, 
steel  and  electricity  are  its  foundations,  communications 
and  quantity  production  its  concrete  manifestations,  and 
rampant  materialism  is  its  spirit.  The  school,  the  press, 
the  railroad,  telegraph,  telephone,  wireless,  the  hospital, 
sewers  and  sanitation  are  by-products  of  industrialization. 
Granting  that  these  are,  or  may  become,  genuine  benefits 
in  the  enhancing  of  human  values,  we  cannot  forget  the 
other  by-products  of  industrialism : the  inhuman  pace  of 
the  factory  and  the  type  of  city  that  grows  up  about  the 
factory,  standardization,  regimentation  and  leveling  to  a 


[10] 


monotone  of  mediocrity,  and  especially,  the  greater  de- 
structiveness of  instruments  of  war. 

All  that  the  Menckens,  Sinclair  Lewises  and  other 
American  rebels  of  today  say  of  our  life  is  true.  Their 
claim  that  life  has  been  standardized,  stratified,  dulled 
and  ironed  out  of  every  element  of  individuality  “until  a 
man  has  become  one  pea  in  a huge  globular  pod,  differing 
from  the  other  peas  in  curvature,  form  and  external 
variations,  but  identical  with  them  in  flavor,  taste  and 
texture,”  contains  altogether  too  much  truth  to  be  com- 
fortable. Where  this  tribe  of  rebels  is  wrong  is  that  they 
have  leveled  their  indictment  against  the  wrong  offender ; 
in  fact,  few  of  them  have  even  recognized  the  offense. 
The  America  of  today, — its  monotony,  tastelessness,  vul- 
garity, superficiality,  and  mob  dictatorship, — is  not  the 
product  of  a unique  American  race  stock  or  race  spirit. 
It  is  the  direct  product  of  the  machine  age.  John  Ruskin 
saw  it  coming,  but  his  protest  was  like  “a  voice  crying 
in  the  wilderness.”  Edward  Carpenter  describes  the  real 
situation  in  his  book,  “Civilization,  Its  Cause  and  Cure,” 
and  many  others  have  correctly  diagnosed  the  “disease.” 

America  today  is  the  England,  France,  Germany  and 
Italy  of  fifty  years  from  today.  It  is  what  it  is  fifty  years 
before  them  because  it  did  not  have  to  overcome  the  ar- 
resting power  of  a long  tradition  and  implanted  social 
forms.  Here  mechanization  could  establish  itself  unre- 
sisted, and  thus  America  is  the  product,  the  inevitable 
product  of  the  machine  age.  You  cannot  have  machinery 
without  quantity  production.  You  cannot  have  quantity 
production  without  standardization.  You  cannot  have 
standardization  of  all  the  material  adjuncts  of  life  without 
standardization  of  thought,  opinion,  ideals,  conduct  and 
morals.  It  is  industrialism,  not  the  race  stock  or  spirit, 
that  has  led  directly  to  our  Babbitts  and  Rotary  Clubs. 


Ill] 


I would  not  be  unmindful  of  all  the  blessings  and  com- 
forts that  have  come  through  industrialism  and  that  have 
tended  to  elevate  the  material  standards  of  life.  Sanita- 
tion, public  cleanliness,  the  combatting  of  disease  by  pre- 
vention and  remedy,  hospitals,  control  of  epidemics,  pre- 
vention of  famine  and  flood, — all  these  could  not  exist 
without  high  technical  skill  and  the  complicated  machin- 
ery of  industrialism.  But  nevertheless  it  does  make  us 
pause  and  wonder  when  we  reflect  that  the  character  of 
modern  life  has  been  shaped  by  sewers  and  drains,  by 
bath  tubs  and  automobiles,  more  than  by  schools  and  by 
churches. 

The  ancient  city  of  Athens  was  filthy,  without  sewers 
and  drains  and  bath  rooms,  and  every  city  in  America, 
large  or  small,  goes  far  beyond  Athens  in  all  these  ma- 
terial advantages.  But  to  my  knowledge  there  is  no  city 
in  the  United  States  or  anywhere  in  this  Western  world 
that  has  yet  produced  a single  ^schylus  or  Sophocles  or 
Euripides,  a single  Socrates  or  Plato  or  Aristotle.  Herein 
lies  the  real  tragedy  of  modern  civilization.  In  all  these 
material  advantages  and  comforts  of  life  we  have  far  sur- 
passed, through  science,  the  ancient  peoples;  but  in  the 
ultimate  values  of  human  life,  in  all  that  makes  for  the 
higher  cultural  life  of  human  beings,  the  signs  of  genuine 
progress  are  not  so  apparent. 

Western  civilization  has  culminated  in  the  ideals  of 
speed,  power  and  material  wealth.  To  attain  these  ends 
we  bend  every  effort,  and  for  the  sake  of  these,  all  other 
things  must  be  subordinated.  But  does  speed  conserve 
necessarily  any  of  the  real  values  of  life?  Does  one  who 
has  visited  one  hundred  cities  understand  them  a hundred 
times  as  well  as  one  who  has  visited  five?  And  has  he 
assimilated  more  of  truth  and  beauty  who  travels  sixty 
miles  an  hour  than  one  who  travels  six  miles  ? Consider 


[12] 


the  Sunday  motorist  or  the  American  tourist.  Or  is  there 
any  value  in  power  apart  from  the  ends  for  which  it  is 
used  ? When  the  titanic  powers  which  science  has  dis- 
closed are  being  devoted  to  destructive  purposes  is  it  not 
time  to  ask  the  question  whether  mere  power,  in  and  of 
itself,  is  necessarily  a value  in  life?  The  income  tax  re- 
ports reveal  the  fact  that  there  has  been  a larger  return 
this  year  than  formerly,  and  the  papers  immediately  con- 
clude that  the  country  is  “more  prosperous”  than  it  has 
been.  But  does  the  fact  that  more  people  are  making 
more  money  necessarily  mean  that  the  country  is  more 
prosperous?  What  does  “prosperity”  mean  to  us?  Is  it 
only  a thing  of  material  wealth,  or  is  it  not  conceivable 
that  a people  might  be  more  truly  “prosperous,”  in  the 
real  values  of  life,  when  it  was  not  making  so  much 
money?  Must  our  highest  standard  be  that  of  material 
wealth,  as  it  undoubtedly  is  for  most  people  today  ? 

It  is  such  searching  questions  that  men  like  Bertrand 
Russell  and  John  Dewey  are  asking, — questions  that  have 
to  do,  not  so  much  with  the  external  machinery  of  modern 
civilization,  as  with  the  philosophy  that  underlies  it,  the 
sort  of  values  it  serves,  the  ideals  it  follows,  the  ends  to 
which  it  is  devoted.  It  is  not  necessary  to  lay  down  dog- 
matic assertions  on  either  side  of  the  question  of  indus- 
trialism. It  is  necessary  only  to  realize  that  there  is  a 
question  with  two  sides.  There  are  indeed  grave  menaces 
to  our  present  civilization,  but  they  do  not  lie  where  the 
flourishing  school  of  peril-mongers  imagine, — in  Nordic 
strains  so-called  or  fancied  uprisings  of  the  colored  races, 
or  inundation  by  some  mythical  class  predestined  at  birth 
to  be  Bolshevik.  The  real  menaces  lie  not  outside  but 
within  civilization  itself,^ — in  its  own  philosophy  of  life 
and  the  ends  for  which  it  is  striving.  Externally,  there  is 
only  as  much  of  menace  as  may  inhere  in  the  fact  that 


[13] 


the  other  peoples  of  the  earth  may  question,  as  indeed 
they  are  questioning,  the  eternal  rightness  of  our  way  of 
organizing  life,  and  prefer  their  own  way  even  to  the 
extent  of  resisting  the  encroachments  of  ours. 

In  contrasting  the  cultural  life  of  China  wth  ours, 
Mr.  Russell  points  out  that  no  one  of  the  three  elements 
entering  into  our  type  of  civilization  has  had  any  appre- 
ciable part  in  the  development  of  China,  unless  it  be  the 
indirect  influence  of  Greece  on  Chinese  painting,  sculp- 
ture and  music.  According  to  Mr.  Russell,  the  two  chief 
determining  influences  in  China’s  development  came 
through  Lao-Tze  and  Confucius,  who  both  belong  to  the 
sixth  century  B.  C.  Lao-Tze  was  a religious  philosopher 
with  a strong  mystical  tendency.  Out  of  his  teachings 
grew  the  scripture  of  religion  known  as  Laoism.  He 
held  that  every  person,  every  animal  and  every  thing  has  a 
certain  way  of  behaving  which  is  natural  to  him  or  her  or 
it,  and  that  we  ought  to  conform  to  this  way  ourselves  and 
encourage  others  to  conform  to  it.  “Lao”  means  “way,” 
and  is  used  in  a more  or  less  mystical  sense,  as  in  the  words 
“I  am  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life.”  Lao-Tze’s  ideas 
were  developed  by  his  disciple,  Chaung-Tze.  The  philoso- 
phy which  both  advocated  was  one  of  freedom.  They 
thought  ill  of  government,  and  of  all  intereferences  with 
nature.  They  complained  of  the  hurry  of  modem  life, 
which  they  contrasted  with  the  calm  existence  of  those 
whom  they  called  “the  pure  men  of  old.”  Their  mysticism 
was  characterized  by  humor,  restraint  and  understate- 
ment, all  of  which  are  revealed  in  the  literature  and  art  as 
well  as  in  the  lives  of  cultivated  Chinese  of  the  present 
day. 

Laoism,  although  it  survived  in  a degenerated  form  as 
magic,  was  entirely  ousted  from  the  favor  of  the  edu- 
cated classes  by  Confucianism.  Confucianism,  as  devel- 


[14] 


oped  by  the  followers  of  Confucius,  is  a system  of  pure 
ethics,  without  religious  dogma  of  any  kind;  it  has  not 
given  rise  to  a powerful  priesthood,  and  it  has  never  led 
to  persecution.  It  has  succeded  in  ingraining  in  the  char- 
acter of  the  people  the  fundamental  principles  of  morals, 
and  has  produced  a whole  nation  possessed  of  exquisite 
manners  and  perfect  courtesy.  These  things,  according  to 
Mr.  Russell,  are  by  no  means  confined  to  one  class ; they 
exist  even  in  the  humblest  coolie.  “It  is  humiliating  to 
watch  the  brutal  insolence  of  white  men  received  by  the 
Chinese  with  a quiet  dignity  which  cannot  demean  itself 
to  answer  rudeness  with  rudeness.  Europeans  often  re- 
gard this  as  a weakness,  but  it  is  really  strength,  the 
strength  by  which  the  Chinese  have  hitherto  conquered 
all  their  conquerors.” 

The  one  and  only  important  foreign  element  in  the 
traditional  civilization  of  the  Chinese  is  Buddhism, 
which  came  into  China  from  India  in  the  early  cen- 
turies of  the  Christian  era.  Buddhism  is  a religion  as 
Confucianism  is  not.  It  has  its  mystic  dogmas,  its  way 
of  salvation  and  a future  life.  And  in  China  a man 
may  be  both  a Buddhist  and  a Confucian,  as  nothing  in 
either  is  incompatible  with  the  other.  The  result  has 
been,  however,  that  the  more  contemplative  and  religious 
natures  turned  to  Buddhism  while  the  active  administra- 
tive type  was  content  with  Confucianism,  which  was  al- 
ways the  official  teaching  in  which  candidates  for  the 
civil  service  were  examined.  Mr.  Russell  regards  China 
as  practically  destitute  of  religion  today,  not  only  in  the 
upper  classes  but  throughout  the  population.  There  is  a 
very  definite  ethical  code,  but  it  is  not  fierce  or  persecut- 
ing, and  does  not  contain  the  notion  of  “sin.”  Except 
quite  recently,  through  European  influence,  there  has 
been  no  science  and  no  industrialism. 


[15] 


But  let  us  examine  more  in  detail,  with  the  aid  of  the 
insight  of  Mr.  Russell,  the  character  of  the  cultural  life 
of  China,  which  has  developed  out  of  these  traditional 
sources.  “The  distinctive  merit  of  our  civilization,”  says 
Mr.  Russell,  “is  the  scientific  method;  the  distinctive 
merit  of  the  Chinese,  a just  conception  of  the  true  ends 
of  life.”  It  is  just  here  that  the  fundamental  contrast  lies. 
Lao-Tze  describes  the  operation  of  “Lao”  as  “production 
without  possession,  action  without  self-assertion,  develop- 
ment without  domination.”  From  these  words,  Mr.  Rus- 
sell thinks  we  can  derive  a conception  of  the  ends  of  life 
as  thoughtful  Chinese  see  them;  and  we  are  bound  to 
admit  that  they  are  very  different  from  the  ends  that 
most  white  men  set  before  themselves.  Possession,  self- 
assertion,  domination  are  the  great  things  that  are  eagerly 
sought  in  the  West  both  by  nations  and  individuals.  They 
have  been  erected  into  a philosophy  by  Nietzsche,  and 
Nietzsche’s  disciples  are  by  no  means  confined  to  Ger- 
many. 

Bertrand  Russell  finds  a definite  superiority  to  our- 
selves, both  in  theory  and  practice,  in  the  freedom  of  the 
Chinese  from  the  tendency  to  self-assertion  and  domina- 
tion. There  is  much  less  desire  than  among  the  white 
races  to  tyrannize  over  other  people.  The  weakness  of 
China  internationally  is  quite  as  much  due  to  this  virtue 
as  to  the  vices  of  political  corruption,  which  are  usually 
assigned  as  the  sole  reason.  If  any  nation  in  the  world 
could  ever  be  “too  proud  to  fight,”  that  nation  would  be 
China.  The  Chinese  are,  as  a rule,  not  good  soldiers, 
because  the  causes  for  which  they  are  asked  to  fight  are 
not  worth  fighting  for,  and  they  know  it.  But  this  is  only 
a proof  of  their  essential  reasonableness.  The  natural 
Chinese  attitude  toward  other  peoples  is  one  of  friendli- 
ness, showing  courtesy  and  expecting  it  in  return.  If 


[16] 


the  Chinese  chose,  with  their  four  hundred  million  popu- 
lation, they  could  be  the  most  powerful  nation  in  the 
world.  But  they  desire  only  freedom,  not  domination, 
which  the  Western  powers  are  constantly  seeking  either 
in  their  political  or  economic  imperialism,  or  both.  It  is 
not  improbable,  our  author  points  out,  that  other  nations 
may  compel  the  Chinese  to  fight  for  their  freedom,  and 
if  so,  they  may  lose  their  natural  virtue  in  this  respect 
and  acquire  a taste  for  empire,  as  other  nations  have  done 
before  them.  But  at  present,  though  they  have  been  an 
imperial  race  for  two  thousand  years,  their  love  for  em- 
pire is  exceedingly  slight. 

While  there  have  been  many  wars  in  China,  Mr.  Rus- 
sell declares  that  the  natural  outlook  of  the  Chinese  is 
very  pacifistic.  In  what  other  country  could  a poet  have 
chosen,  as  PcnChui  did  in  one  of  his  poems  that  has  been 
translated  by  Mr.  Waley,  and  called  by  him,  “The  Old 
Man  With  the  Broken  Arm,”  to  make  a hero  of  a recruit 
who  maimed  himself  to  escape  military  service?  The 
pacifism  of  the  Chinese  is  not  due  to  the  activities  of 
Peace  Societies,  but  is  rooted  in  their  contemplative  out- 
look on  life,  and  in  the  fact  that  they  do  not  desire  to 
change  whatever  they  see  or  to  subdue  others  to  their  way 
of  life.  They  take  an  instinctive  pleasure,  as  their  lit- 
erature and  art  reveal,  in  observing  the  characteristic 
manifestations  of  different  kinds  of  life,  and  they  seem 
to  have  no  wish  to  reduce  everything  to  a preconceived 
pattern. 

The  Chinese  know  nothing  of  the  ideal  of  progress  in 
the  form  in  which  it  has  come  to  dominate  the  Western 
nations  in  the  last  two  or  three  centuries,  and  which 
affords  a rationalization  of  our  active  impulses.  Progress 
is  a very  modem  ideal  even  with  us;  it  is  part  of  what 

[17] 


we  owe  to  science  and  industrialism.  The  cultivated  con- 
servative Chinamen  of  the  present  day  talk  exactly  as 
their  earliest  sages  write.  If  the  Westerner  points  out  to 
them  that  this  shows  how  little  progress  there  has  been 
in  China,  they  will  say:  “Why  seek  progress  when  you 
already  enjoy  what  is  excellent?”  At  first  thought,  this 
point  of  view  strikes  the  average  Occidental  as  indolence, 
due  to  lack  of  ambition,  but  as  one  reflects  upon  it, 
doubts  as  to  one’s  own  wisdom  gradually  persist  in  in- 
truding themselves,  until  at  last,  one  begins  to  wonder 
how  much  of  what  we  call  “progress”  is,  after  all,  only 
restless  change,  bringing  us  no  nearer  to  any  desirable 
goal ; and  how  much  that  is  truly  “excellent”  we  have 
lost  in  our  insatiable  thirst  for  new  fields  to  conquer. 

Mr.  Russell  traces  an  interesting  contrast  between  what 
the  Chinese  have  sought  in  the  West  and  what  the  West 
has  sought  in  China.  “The  Chinese  in  the  West  seek 
knowledge,  in  the  hope, — which  I fear  is  usually  vain, — 
that  the  knowledge  they  find  may  prove  a gateway  to 
wisdom.”  It  is  this  wisdom  that  lies  beyond  the  facts, 
that  consists  in  an  interpretation  of  the  facts, — ^that  is, 
in  a consistent  philosophy  of  life, — that  the  thoughtful 
Chinese  seem  to  be  ever  seeking,  and  that  so  few  in  the 
West  know  anything  about.  White  men,  on  the  other 
hand,  have  gone  to  China  with  three  motives : to  fight, 
to  make  money,  and  to  convert  the  Chinese  to  their  re- 
ligion. “The  last  of  these  motives  has  the  merit  of  being 
idealistic,  and  has  inspired  many  heroic  lives.  But  the 
soldier,  the  merchant  and  the  missionary  are  alike  con- 
cerned to  stamp  our  civilization  upon  the  whole  world ; 
they  are  all  three,  in  a certain  sense,  pugnacious.” 

The  Chinese  are  willing  to  learn  from  others,  provided 
they  are  convinced  that  it  is  worth  learning,  but  they 
have  no  wish  to  convert  us  to  Confucianism  or  to  their 


[18] 


ideals  for  life.  They  say,  “religions  are  many,  reason  is 
one,”  and  with  that  they  are  content  to  let  us  go  our  way. 
According  to  Mr.  Russell,  the  tolerance  of  the  Chinese 
is  in  excess  of  anything  that  Westerners  can  imagine 
from  their  experience  at  home.  We  imagine  ourselves 
tolerant,  only  because  we  are  a little  more  so  than  our 
intolerant  ancestors.  But  we  still  practice  political,  so- 
cicil,  religious  and  racial  persecution,  of  which  the  Chinese 
would  never  be  guilty,  and  still  more,  we  are  firmly  per- 
suaded that  our  civilization,  our  religion  and  our  way  of 
life  are  immeasurably  better  than  any  other ; so  that  when 
we  come  across  a nation  like  China  or  India  we  are  con- 
vinced that  the  very  kindest  thing  we  can  do  to  them  is 
to  make  them  just  like  ourselves. 

Then  there  is  the  Chinese  capacity  for  simple  enjoy- 
ments and  instinctive  happiness.  In  the  number  of  things 
we  possess,  we  of  the  West  are  incomparably  better  off 
than  the  Chinese,  but  one  may  legitimately  question 
whether  these  material  advantages  yield  us  a larger  re- 
turn of  happiness;  and  if  life  does  not  yield  us  happiness 
what  is  it  for  ? The  Chinaman  works  hard  and  long,  but 
his  work  is  not  deadening.  He  is  a craftsman,  not  a 
mere  tender  of  machines.  He  makes  something  in  which 
he  can  express  himself.  He  does  not,  as  yet,  spend  his 
life  turning  one  screw  or  lifting  one  lever  a thousand 
times  a day,  the  relation  of  which  to  the  finished  product 
he  does  not  know  or  care  to  know.  He  has  a personal 
relation  to  his  work,  his  fellow-workers  and  the  product. 
He  chats  as  he  works,  takes  a cup  of  tea,  stops  to  regard 
the  passing  excitement  in  the  street,  or  greet  a friend  or 
to  reprimand  his  children,  for  his  workshop  is  also  his 
home.  If  he  has  not  so  much  leisure  measured  in  hours, 
he  has  more  of  leisureliness.  He  has  not  the  harried, 
worried  look  seen  on  the  faces  in  American  cities.  If  he 


[19] 


can  play  at  his  work,  as  Americans  cannot,  he  also  does 
not  work  at  his  play  as  so  many  Americans  do. 

Last  of  all,  there  is  the  proverbial  honesty  of  the  Chi- 
nese. The  Chinese  are  well  known  to  be  the  most  honest 
nation  on  the  globe.  The  word  of  a Chinaman  is,  not  “as 
good  as  his  bond,” — it  is  his  bond,  and  is  accepted  as  such 
the  whole  world  round.  The  big  exporting  houses  in  the 
Western  world  would  rather  do  business  with  the  Chinese 
than  with  any  other  people,  because  they  are  “so  reliable 
and  can  be  trusted.” 

These  are  some  of  the  fundamental  traits  of  Chinese 
character  that  find  expression  in  their  higher  cultural  life, 
as  Bertrand  Russell  interprets  them  for  us.  To  him,  they 
grow  out  of  a certain  philosophy  of  life,  a clear  concep- 
tion of  the  true  ends  of  life.  The  average  Chinaman, 
even  if  he  is  miserably  poor,  is  happier  than  the  average 
Englishman  or  American,  because  his  life  is  based  upon 
a more  humane  and  truly  civilized  outlook  than  our  own. 
“Restlessness  and  pugnacity  not  only  cause  obvious 
evils,  but  fill  our  lives  with  discontent,  incapacitate  us 
for  the  enjoyment  of  beauty,  and  make  us  practically  in- 
capable of  the  contemplative  virtues.  I do  not  deny  that 
the  Chinese  go  too  far  in  the  other  direction ; but  for  that 
very  reason  I think  contact  between  East  and  West  is 
likely  to  be  fruitful  to  both  parties.  They  may  learn  from 
us  the  indispensable  minimum  of  practical  efficiency,  and 
we  may  learn  from  them  something  of  that  contemplative 
wisdom  which  has  enabled  them  to  persist  while  all  the 
other  nations  of  antiquity  have  perished.” 

If  one  is  disposed  to  think  that  Mr.  Russell  has  ideal- 
ized the  civilization  of  China,  slighted  its  defects  and  ex- 
aggerated its  excellencies,  Mr.  Dewey  admits  that  dis- 
criminating Chinese  would  be  the  first  to  make  this  criti- 
cism. But  Mr.  Dewey  continues,  after  a three-year  resi- 


120] 


dence  in  China : “I  do  not  regard  this  fact,  however,  as 
a serious  defect.  For  my  own  experience  in  China  con- 
vinces me  that  Mr.  Russell  has  justly  stated  the  direction 
in  which  Chinese  excellence  exists.  * * * And  I do 
not  find  it  in  me  to  differ  from  Mr.  Russell  as  to  the  ex- 
tent and  urgency  of  the  need  in  the  West  to  pause  and 
learn  from  the  Orient.” 

In  spite  of  the  startling  fact  that  these  two  foremost 
philosophers  of  the  Western  world  are  thus  bidding  us 
pause  and  learn  from  the  Orient,  I do  not  have  great 
hopes  that  the  present  leaders  of  Western  civilization  will 
heed  their  injunction.  Their  eyes  are  blinded  by  the  false 
gods  of  speed  and  power  and  wealth,  and  to  them,  our 
way  of  life  is  the  only  way  for  all  the  world. 

But  to  all  thoughtful  minds,  and  their  number  is  stead- 
ily increasing,  I would,  earnestly  commend  this  book  of 
Bertrand  Russell’s.  The  Problem  of  China  is,  for  China, 
the  problem  as  to  whether  she  can  retain  the  best  in  her 
own  cultural  life  while  she  accepts  the  best  that  the  West 
has  to  offer,  or  whether  she  will  lose  her  former  concep- 
tion of  the  just  ends  of  life  and  become  like  the  West  in 
its  restless  search  for  wealth  and  its  love  of  domination. 
The  fate  of  China  hangs  indeed  in  the  balance  as  we 
await  the  result  of  the  contact  of  her  ancient  civilization 
with  the  newer  forces  from  the  West. 

But  the  problem  for  Occidental  civilization  is  the  still 
more  serious  one,  as  to  whether  we  have  gone  too  far  to 
pause  and  think  whither  we  are  tending.  The  question 
of  comparative  civilizations  is,  from  this  viewpoint,  the 
burning  problem  of  our  age.  We  must  begin  to  face  it 
with  more  of  honesty  and  less  of  ignorance.  We  have 
taken  for  granted  far  too  complacently  the  superiority 
of  our  own  civilization  over  all  others,  and  have  acted  too 
confidently  on  that  assumption.  Our  actions  have  caused 


[21] 


great  wars,  and,  if  continued,  they  will  cause  still  more 
deadly  wars  in  the  future.  Our  civilization,  as  it  stands, 
has  subordinated  all  human  values  to  material  values ; we 
magnify  things,  but  we  minimize  human  personalities. 
Surely  we  must  all  agree  that  the  only  civilization  worthy 
the  name,  or  worthy  to  continue,  is  the  civilization  that 
tends  primarily  toward  the  enrichment  and  enlargement 
of  the  human  personality. 

It  is  not  so  much  a question  of  the  external  machinery 
of  civilization  as  it  is  of  the  philosophy  that  underlies  our 
civilization.  It  is  here  that  the  changes  must  begin  if  they 
are  ever  to  find  expression  in  the  outward  reorganization 
of  society.  Fundamentally,  it  is  a question  of  what  we 
deem  to  be  the  ultimate  values  of  life.  This  is  the  prob- 
lem to  which  Bertrand  Russell  and  John  Dewey  would 
turn  our  attention.  For  the  sake  of  the  future  of  the 
white  race,  and  of  all  races,  the  great  powers  particularly 
must  cultivate  a little  more  intellectual  and  spiritual  hu- 
mility. They  must  be  willing  to  learn  from  others.  They 
must  realize  that  our  Western  civilization  is  itself  some- 
what parvenu  and  a little  callow,  and  that  conditions  in 
the  world  today  demand  a thorough  and  sincere  re-exami- 
nation of  the  very  bases  upon  which  it  rests.  Out  of  such 
a realization  might  come  a better  world  in  which  civiliza- 
tion was  made  to  serve  humanity  as  now  it  limits  and 
destroys  it. 


[22] 


BOOKS 


1 —  By  John  Hajmes  Holmes 

The  Revolutionary  Function  of  the  Modern 
Church.  $1.50. 

Marriage  and  Divorce.  7Sc. 

Is  Death  the  End?  $1.50. 

New  Wars  for  Old.  (Out  of  print.) 

Religion  for  Today.  $1.75. 

Life  and  Letters  of  Robert  Collyer.  (Out  of  print.) 

Is  Violence  the  Way  Out?  $1.25. 

New  Churches  for  Old.  $2.00. 

The  Grail  of  Life,  an  Anthology  of  Heroic  Life 
and  Death.  $2.00. 

2 —  By  John  Herman  Randall 

A New  Philosophy  of  Life.  $2.00. 

The  Culture  of  Personality.  $2.00. 

The  Life  of  Reality.  $2.00. 

Humanity  at  the  Crossroads.  $2.00. 

The  Philosophy  of  Power.  $2.00. 

The  Spirit  of  the  New  Philosophy.  $2.00. 

The  Essence  of  Democracy.  $1.50. 

The  New  Light  on  Immortality.  $1.75. 

The  above  volumes  are  on  sale  through  the  office  of  the 
Community  Church  for  list  price,  plus  postage.  The  vol- 
umes marked  “Out  of  print’’  may  be  borrowed  from  the 
library  of  the  church. 


